Police Blotter: Father accused of inappropriate touching

Friday, August 15, 2014

No charges have been filed but police are investigating allegations of child molestation made by a concerned person.

A worker from the Department of Social Services contacted the Sheriff’s Office after receiving a report from an anonymous caller that a 31-year-old Georgetown man was seen acting inappropriately with two young girls.

The DSS worker was told the man was at a community event in Belle Isle July 25. He was accompanied by two girls – ages 4 and 6. He was also with a woman who appeared to be in her 30s.

During the event, the man was seen picking up one of the girls while sliding his hand under her clothing.

Although the Sheriff’s Office redacted some of what the man is accused of doing from the report, it does state the man was seen moving his hand against the child “in a manner which was clearly sexual.”

The caller told the DSS worker the man “looked around in a strange way after this incident.”

The same family, the DSS worker was told, was seen at the community pool July 30. During that time the other girl was seen touching herself in an inappropriate manner.

The caller said the children “seem happy and (were) playing normally” other than the two reported incidents.

The DSS worker talked to the girls. She was told both girls often shower with the man – identified on the report as their father.

The worker was told the man sometimes sleeps in the nude on the floor and plays and game called “wake up and catch” but no details were given on how the game is played.

The case has been turned over to the Children’s Recovery Center for further investigation.

Trespassing?

Deputies were sent to a home in the 3000 block of Kent Road near Andrews around 11 p.m., Aug. 2, because of a report of a burglary in progress.

When they arrived they saw the homeowner had the suspect – a 45-year-old Greenville man – in a choke hold. The officer detained the suspect while he tried to figure out what happened.

The homeowner was “very irate” but said the suspect was on trespass notice and he wanted him prosecuted “to the fullest extent of the law.”

The suspect said he was invited to the house by the complainant’s wife.

When the deputy asked to speak to the homeowner’s wife, the man said “I told you he was creeping around my house like a burglar or something.”

The man then went inside and slammed the door. He returned minutes later saying his wife did not want to say anything.

The deputy said he needed to hear that from her.

The man’s wife finally came to the door. She said the man did stop by earlier that day and she told him to return later. She did not know he would wait until 11 p.m. to return.

She said the man was not stealing or trespassing and did not need to go to jail.

The homeowner got madder and said the next time he gets his hands on the subject, the outcome will be different.

The accused man was advised to stay away from the house for the night.

A man said when he walked past the apartment he heard a tattoo gun go off.

The man said he knew the people who live in the apartment and had been in their home and had see tattooing equipment firsthand.

An officer met with the accused tattooist who said he does have tattoo equipment from a previous business he owned but denied tattooing anyone at the apartment.

He said he does have a tattoo license, although he was unable to find it.

Since there was no proof of a crime, the officer left the scene.

Comments

Notice about comments:

South Strand News is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not South Strand News.

If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full terms and conditions.